The Enlightenment: Crash Course European History #18

Hi I’m John Green and this is Crash Course
European History. So far, we’ve seen a ton of political change
and continuing warfare in the midst of the seventeenth century’s little ice age, and
history often focuses on these types of political and military stories, but there were also
other changes occurring: shifts in how people perceived the everyday world. The linking of phenomena like earthquakes
and eclipses with human events goes back a very long way, like to the beginning of our
species, as does the belief that supernatural forces are deeply shaping the lives of individual
humans. For instance, in a previous video about witchcraft,
we discussed how earthquake tremors in Istanbul in 1648 were seen as portents of a sultan’s
death a few months later. But a century after that, a huge earthquake
struck Lisbon, Portugal on All Saints’ Day of 1755. Tens of thousands of people died, many from
a tsunami that followed the quake. Now, some theologians argued this was punishment
from God for the world’s sins, but others pointed out that the earthquake had destroyed
a lot of churches while sparing a lot of brothels. Voltaire wrote a famous poem in response to
the earthquake that included the memorable lines “As the dying voices call out, will
you dare respond to this appalling spectacle of smoking ashes with, “This is the necessary
effect of the eternal laws Freely chosen by God?” The way Europeans were looking at the world
had changed between the Istanbul earthquake and the Lisbon one: The Enlightenment was
thriving. [Intro]
So, today we want to emphasize that the Enlightenment wasn’t all high fallutin’ calculations
of the sun’s orbit or theories about the mathematical laws of the universe or for that
matter theories about earthquake causality. It also considered more down-to-earth situations
like how people of different social classes relate to one another, how trade and manufacturing
should function, and what the relationship of ordinary people should be to their government. The Enlightenment or Age of Light refers to
the belief that the musty old ideas needed to be exposed to rational investigation to
see if they were still valuable. The bright light of reason needed to shine
on tradition. And this momentous challenge to tradition
came about during a time in which Europe was being completely transformed in many ways
that are sometimes forgotten amid all the excitement about Voltaire and reason. So let’s go straight to the Thought Bubble
today. 1. Beyond the wars and state-building we’ve
already seen, 2. increasing abundance and novelty was creeping
into the everyday lives of Europeans. 3. Coffee, tea, chocolate, tobacco, and other
commodities led to experimentation. 4. For instance, one English housewife saw tea
for the first time and thought it was meant to be baked as a kind of pie filling. 5. A diplomat said that tea and coffee had brought
a greater “sobriety” and “civility” to everyday life in Europe. 6. Europe had previously been a land of famine
and mere subsistence for essentially all of its history. 7. But now the cultivation of new foods from
the Americas like potatoes and corn, 8. along with literally thousands of other
new plants, meant that available calories were increasing, 9. And it also introduced the idea that maybe
the world didn’t have to be perpetually on the brink of starvation and catastrophe. 10. Also, by this time, tens of thousands of Europeans
had traveled the world, and had experienced other social orders first hand. 11. For instance, travelers discovered that people
across Asia didn’t seem as quarrelsome as Europeans. 12. Drivers of carts did not block narrow streets
for hours arguing over who had the right of way. 13. They politely agreed to let one or the other
pass. 14. They also saw that not all social orders were
as hierarchical as most European ones, 15. and that some societies even gave less
weight to a person’s parentage 16. and more to that person’s individual
skills and talents. Thanks Thought Bubble. [[TV-Montesquieu]] One of the first ways writers
criticized outmoded ways of life was to make fun of them…writers like Charles-Louis de
Secondat, Baron de La Brède et de Montesquieu, aka Just Montesquieu. (He really was the person to criticize outmoded
ways of life because, boy did he have an outmoded name.) Montesquieu was a jurist who owned an estate
near Bordeaux, which still makes wine under his name, and in 1721, he published the Persian
Letters in which Uzbek visitors find Europe amusing if not shocking. The visitors, for instance, are amazed at
the magic of priests who somehow perform the trick of turning wine into blood. And although they clearly see the problems
in French society, they firmly adhere to the mustiness of their own ways, such as keeping
women secluded in a harem and guarded by eunuchs. The message was that both easterners and Europeans
were imperfect. The author Voltaire–who, slightly off topic,
was very handsome. I mean, very striking eyes. At any rate, he had similarly critical and
amusing takes; his discourtesy to aristocrats eventually got him sent to the Bastille prison,
in fact. In many rollicking tales, he made fun of overweening
rulers and their endless corruptions. He valued honesty and those who lived simple
lives “cultivating their gardens,” as he famously put it in his satirical novel
Candide (1759), which you can learn more about in Crash Course Literature. Full of horrors and injustice, Candide appeared
four years after the Lisbon earthquake, which Voltaire thought was firm evidence that we
did not live in the best of all possible worlds. To replace the old stuffy ways of monarchs
and aristocrats, people needed to learn how to embrace the newly-desirable traits of the
Enlightenment, like being honest, and inquisitive, and open. Swiss thinker Jean-Jacques Rousseau had many
ideas about education reform, for instance. He was not a wealthy or titled person but
rather was born into a watchmaking family and lived among artisans. His best-selling novel Emile (1762) describes
a boy who grows up not in a city or palace but in a countryside where one can be oneself—a
natural individual. Instead of experiencing common rote learning,
with large doses of religious and classical reading, Emile learns carpentry, and gardening,
and other practical skills. In the countryside he behaves in the best
possible way—naturally and without pretentious airs. Rousseau promoted what would come to be called
middle-class values, like hard work, practicality, and domesticity for women. When Emile becomes a young man, the spouse
chosen for him is plump and smiling and devoted to taking care of him—not studying or reading
or practicing a craft or working hard to support the family like farm women did. Also, she will breast feed their children,
whereas both aristocratic women and busy working women at the time commonly used wet nurses. As with Emile’s upbringing, all of this
is presented as “natural.” Meanwhile, wealthy women in Europe instituted
the Enlightenment salon: regular get-togethers in their homes to hear the latest idea, learn
about the latest book, or meet the latest philosopher-influencer—called a philosophe
in French. Slightly off topic, but I just love the idea
of Rousseau and Voltaire as influencers. Like, I would have loved to see their instagram
feeds. Voltaire’s smoldering selfies,
Rousseau’s weird rants written in the notes app and then screenshotted. It would have been gold. At any rate, 18th Century Salon goers were
often great readers or experimenters with the latest commodities and fashion. Just like contemporary influencers, actually. And in terms of fashion, instead of looking
to the courts for fashion inspiration, men like Voltaire now sported cottons from India
made into handkerchiefs that were worn around the neck, which would soon metamorphose into
the necktie). They also sported banyans—that is loose
bathrobe type garments—that did not need corsets, which men traditionally wore. As Rousseau believed, men should take off
their make-up, wigs, and high heels and be natural—just like people did in other parts
of the world. Just natural man as he is naturally made in
the countryside, wearing a Banyan and a feathered hat. Transformation was in the air for everyone,
not just the elites. Although imported foreign cottons were still
illegal in France, for instance, many people now wore them, including servants, who received
cast-off cotton dresses or shirts that were bright and easy to keep clean. And to help people learn, there were many
more texts. Like in France, there was the Encyclopedie
(you’ll notice my amazing French pronunciation). It provided discussions of topics such as
natural rights and the status of women. Its main editor Denis Diderot wrote: “All
things must be examined, debated, investigated without exception and without regard for anyone’s
feelings.”[1] Diderot favored social and political reform. But the Encyclopedie–you know what, I’m
gonna just translate it–Encyclopedia, also contained technical drawings of machinery,
including machinery for mining. And that reflected practical values and also
provided a spur to inventiveness and growing prosperity in Europe. Also, mining, which was already pretty important,
was about to become EXTREMELY important, thanks to coal. In general, Enlightenment aims were more worldly
than spiritual. In Scotland, philosopher David Hume promoted
reason above religion, concluding that belief in God was mere superstition. Some people, called Deists, argued that God
existed but that he didn’t influence everyday life after having set the machine of the universe
in motion. Many important “founding fathers” of the
United States were deists, and if you believe, as many philosphers did, that God keeps a
distance from human affairs, then the persecution of people for their religious beliefs starts
to seem like cruel fanaticism. And some philosophes became activists. Like, Voltaire was outraged by the torture
of Jean Calas, who had been accused of murdering his son to prevent him from converting to
Catholicism. (Calas’s son had in fact committed suicide
due to gambling debts.) Calas was waterboarded and had every bone
in his body broken before eventually dying under torture. Is there a bone back there? All right, listen. This is a femur. I don’t think this is an actual femur, I
think it’s, like a recrea–Stan is this a real femur? It is NOT a real femur. So I asked our brilliant writer Bonnie if
Calas really had every bone in his body broken and she repsonded, “It’s hard to know
whether they got every one,” and then she described Calas’s torture to me with a level
of detail that led me to conclude that ONE they probably did break every bone in his
body, and TWO oh my god torture in 18th century Europe was THE WORST. So, last thing I’m going to say about this:
if you invent a time machine, and I believe absolutely that you can, do not go back in
time before like, maybe 2003? Don’t get me wrong–things are bad, but
remember: they used to be so much worse. Speaking of terrible, let’s talk about slavery. So, Enlightenment views also fed into rising
movements in Britain, France, the Netherlands, and their colonies to abolish slavery. By this time, the slave trade was massive
and there was growing acknowledgement of its cruelt. In 1770, the French Catholic abbé (or, clergyman)
Guillaume Raynal laid out the violent devastation of native peoples by invading Europeans. And in 1788 the freed slave Olaudah Equiano
described the middle passage after he had been kidnapped in present-day Nigeria and
enslaved. Now Equiano is often believed to have been
born in South Carolina, and his riveting memoir may have been cobbled together from the harrowing
tales of others. Still, it was a bestseller. It captured the inhumanity of whites towards
blacks, advocated Enlightenment freedom and human rights for all. It also stirred freedmen and slaves to struggle
for abolition. And there was also growing movements for other
kinds of freedom. The Scotsman Adam Smith took on the mercantilist
theory that global wealth was static and states could only increase wealth by taking it from
others when he rejected ideas about stockpiling gold, and refusing entry of goods into one’s
country, and also remaining a subsistence agricultural economy with serfs. He advocated for manufacturing, the division
of labor, and free trade. In a free or laissez-faire market, an individual
would work and interact with others in the economy on the basis of their self-interest. And the sum of all self-interests would make
for a balanced, harmonious, and prosperous society. Smith is best known as the father of the free
market, free trade, and individualism thanks to his 1776 book An Inquiry into the Nature
and Causes of The Wealth of Nations. But he also opposed absolutism and urged concern
for the overall well-being of society. In addition to the benefits of laissez-faire
that he saw, Smith saw the potential harms, so he also argued for healing social policies. Another important Enlightenment book was Jean-Jacques
Rousseau’s The Social Contract, which famously begins “Man is born free and everywhere
he is in chains.” Rousseau picked up on John Locke’s theme
of the contract that individuals made with one another to form a state or nation. And he believed that Once freely formed, the
state embodied the best that was in the collective community; thus individuals needed to give
the state unconditional obedience because it represented the “general will.” Today, thinkers see that this call for obedience
to the general will planted the seeds of dictatorial governments in the twentieth century and beyond. But, Rousseau did also emphasize individual
sentiments as valuable. At the opposite end of Rousseau’s “general
will” was German philosopher Emmanuel Kant’s attention to individual reason. He famously exclaimed, “Dare to Know”
as he advanced the Enlightenment’s commitment to the human mind and the ability of every
person to think for themselves instead of simply obeying old commands and ideas. The human mind, he argued, housed “categories
of understanding” with which information interacted to produce purely rational judgments. And in this way, Kant shared the faith in
the individual of both Jean-Jacques Rousseau and Adam Smith, and we can trace our own culture’s
individualism back to the Enlightenment. And many other individuals took refuge in
Enlightenment thought as well as taking it as a call to action. Upper-class Jewish women across Europe found
the world of ideas so inspiring that they began salons, too. In Berlin, they established nine of the fourteen
salons in the city. And philosopher and author Moses Mendelssohn
used the more tolerant atmosphere to express his optimism about the future of Jews in Europe. Because of the Enlightenment emphasis on reason,
he believed that the age-old persecution of Jews would soon end. Of course, we now know that that wasn’t
the case. And much exploitation and oppression has taken
place in the guise of reasoned thought. Pseudoscientific “reason” has been used
to justify many forms of structural inequality, from racism to sexism to class systems. Rationality would not prove to be a way out
of the human urge to create and marginalize outsiders. But Enlightenment thought was nonetheless
transformative, and seeking worldly explanations for inequality and injustice did have significant
real-world consequences. I mean, no longer would we see Earthquakes
merely as acts of God. Enlightenment challenges to the idea that
we already were living in the best of all possible worlds would help us to imagine,
and eventually live in, better worlds–albeit ones that are still profoundly imperfect. Thanks for watching. I’ll see you next time. ________________
[1] Quoted in Lynn Hunt et al., The Making of the West: Peoples and Cultures, 6th ed. (Boston: Bedford St. Martins,
2019) 616.

You are mistaking Rousseau with Hobbes, Hobbes is the one whose thought can be characterized by obedience to the state. Rousseau says in the Social Contract that every state is bad except one where the legislature would be directly democratic (and where the executive is chosen by election instead of inheritance, and judiciary is chosen by lot). Kant wasn't at the opposite end of Rousseau, in fact, he held Rousseau's teaching about the general will in such high esteem that he called Rousseau the "Newton of the moral universe". Both talked about how individual rights must be universal /general.

@John Green – Teaching AP Euro this year and want to shout out this series for helping me organize my thoughts before each lecture and consider things I may have missed (My kids loved Christine de Pizan and I had never heard about her before your Northern Renaissance video). Also as a trained historian I want to say this series is really top notch from a methodological standpoint, doing a really good job incorporating a range of perspectives and notably never forgetting to discuss the lives and history of women in videos. A+

I was once called a "Child of the Enlightenment" after I called out someones pseudoscience of iron magnets healing their wrist pain. Still trying to figure out if they meant it as an insult and if I should take as a compliment…

Actually, if you pay attention to the entire bible and not church tradition, destroying churches and sparing brothels makes some sense. Jesus obviously took major issue with the religious leaders of his time, and it wouldn't be much of a stretch to say he'd take similar views towards the 18th century church. Prostitution on the other hand, is only specifically condemned if practiced by the daughter of a household, ie: the head of house's property. For orphans it is not a problem. This is best emphasized in the story of Judah and Tamar, where Judah hiring a prostitute is considered no big deal, while Tamar is sentenced to death for dishonoring the family name.

First of all, Kant's first name was spelled 'Immanuel'. Second of all, the picture you have there of Kant is not Kant, but actually his contemporary F.H. Jacobi. I could nitpick the other stuff about Kant's architecture of the mind, but that's perhaps for a philosophy episode, rather than a history lecture (although one should perhaps mention Kant's theory of history, which would be important for later German thought on history, particularly Hegel and Marx)

11:30 There was also the fact that it wasn't as profitable as it had once been. Populations in Europe were growing and the European leaders looked overseas for settling them, but that meant that there must be labour there to perform and slavery kind of gets in the way of that.

I appreciate you putting the sources in the description (and it took too long for you to start doing it) but it would be great to be a bit more specific, I'd love to read more about those europeans encountering different social structures, without having to search through two full-length books, and possibly missing the reference anyway..

15:17 Yes, reason has even been used by the Crash Course YouTube channel to justify the structural inequality and oppression of the Communist Party in China. Unfortunate that the irony was lost on you.

Maybe it was punishment from god for sin, but there was more sin in the churches than the brothels.

Jesus dealt harshly with religious officials who used god's law for their own earthly gain, John 2:13-22. On the other hand, with many other people, like the woman caught in adultery, he protected from the religious leaders. Though after he protected her from them, he did say, "go and sin no more", he did not condone the adultery, John 8:1-11.

The part about slavery was weak. Slavery was occasionally challenged on moral grounds (quakers being notable examples) but was generally challenged not on the basis of the atrocities being committed against Black peoples, but on the basis that slavery is not the most efficient way to extract value from people. Slaves aren't consumers, whereas exploited proletarian workers are. As such, the latter group produces more profits overall for the the wealthy elite than does the former. This theme emerges several times from enlightenment/modernist antislavery efforts, including the 1807 British ban on the slave trade (driven by British inability to compete with other slave-trading powers) the 1833 British abolition of slavery, and the competing Northern and Southern economies in the United States (Stacy Smith's book Freedom's Frontier has a truly excellent examination of this last case, situating antislavery not as an effort to uplift Black people, but as an effort to replace them with white free wage labourers). Liberalism (that is to say, enlightenment/modernist thought) is not actually liberatory; it is just about subtler, more efficient methods of exploitation (Cf. Foucault and Gramsci).

When Voltaire and Fridrich the II (yes, the same Prussian Emperor from the previous episode) were sailing on a boat, Voltaire noticed it was leaking and quickly got out. Fridrich laughed and noticed "You care too much about your life. I, you see, am not afraid of death". Voltaire immediately exclaimed: "well of course, there are a lot of kings besides you, but there is only one Voltaire!“

Hello, also relevant in the Lisbon earthquake:the extreme religiose Portuguese society was;the earthquake happen during mass;and finally and more relevant the several fires that rage for several days and burn almost the city.

The low area in Lisbon was also a large section of the Jewish Quarter, however it was not called 'little Jerusalem' as many tour guides claim to my knowledge. The Portuguese government however does not want to excavate the area, because there is not a Jewish Museum, so a lot of the jewish artifacts would not stay in Portugal.

Also, this sounds better than socialism. I think Smith's system (based on capital? Capitalism?…that sounds nice, has a ring to it) sounds better than any socialism. It sounds more dynamic than it. The things that people say about capitalism all the time, maybe are a little untrue??? I would be okay with a theoretical democratic socialism, though I believe we would eventually come closer to capitalism than socialism (whatever we call what we are doing). I like social democracy, but really I might like my own country's liberal economy better than German style Social Democracy.

The social contract simply seems like a social version of what someone might call structuralism (the linguists called it that first, then people outside of linguistics called it that. Narrative theory was big in churches in the early 2000s, and big in universities before then).

I love Kant, but it is so so so so hard to figure out what he is saying (about anything, the Pleasant, the Good, the Sublime, Noumenon, Thing in itself, the State, the Good in itself and for itself)….He writes in this way that is so hard for minds to decifer and clear up. It is like the worst about Kant went on and influenced the worst about Hegel, and Heidegger (god damn that last man's reputation to the flames of ignomity).

God only knows how we will get to the 19th century. Romanticism. Colonialism. Early Socialism and Labor Unionism (unless that last one is in the 1700s). Abolitionism. The fight against sex trafficking ("white slavery"), again abolitionism. Romanticism, German Idealism. Utilitarianism. Traditionalism. Anarchist Ideas (though again, those started in the 1700s with William Godwin). Feminism? (feminist salons? Mary Wollstonecraft).

Too bad this didn't spread to china.. Got avoid drinking that cold water in 2019 because my grandma's grandma told her it was bad. And I can't ever know better than they did because of this nonsensical ancestor worship.

Heyyy John Green…There's this question that has been killing me…Its about your book The Fault In Our Stars…Does Hazel die after the end of the book because of her sickness??Please answer….P.S- I LOVE ALL YOUR BOOKS

Honesty, Inquisitiveness, Openness.. Social gatherings that foster learning For Fun. Ignoring unjust or over reaching Law,, "Natural Individual" "Dare to Know. "All things must be examined, Debated, investigated without exception and without regard for anyone's feelings"..?.. This Enlightenment thing sounds nice. About time for a refresher coarse I think..